WEDNESDAY 21 JUNE 2000

MR DAVID HOE-RICHARDSON

  560. I now call Mr David Hoe-Richardson from a patient involvement group, East Riding Cancer Services Alliance.

  (Mr Hoe-Richardson) Good afternoon. I should like to address the Committee on the subject of prostate cancer. For far too long men's health in general and men's cancers in particular have had a very low priority. Eighty-nine per cent of men have no knowledge that they possess a prostate gland, where it is situated or what function it performs. Men are much less likely to go to consult a health professional than women. By the very nature of the fact that they get prostate cancer or testicular cancer, they do not want to talk about those sorts of things. When I was diagnosed with the disease some six years ago, the only warning I had was blood in my urine on a particular day. Because I worked within the Health Service I realised that I should see my GP. The result, upon eventual diagnosis, some six months later, was metastasised prostate cancer. I was given no offers of information or help to learn more about what this meant. I was just told I had cancer, it was in my bones, that was it. I immediately set out to research the disease and its possible treatments and became very knowledgeable about it. My GP even admitted that I eventually knew more than he did. However, as opposed to the few men like myself who have thoroughly researched the subject, there is the vast majority of men who are totally ignorant. This Government, as also previous governments, are refusing to accept that a screening programme would be useful. I wrote to James Cran, my MP, about this and received a standard response from Yvette Cooper. I should like to quote two things from her reply. First of all she gives a lot of very misleading out-of-date statistics about how many men it affects. The facts are that it affects 21,000 new cases per year and of those at least half will die. She also says that the national screening committee who advise you agreed that using current techniques for testing and treatment was no evidence a screening programme could save lives and considerable evidence that the programme would increase impotence and incontinence. I do not believe that is the case. I believe that is erroneous information. The screening programme itself, which consists of a digital rectal examination, plus a simple blood test, cannot cause impotence or incontinence. That is totally misleading. Whether or not there is an early national screening programme, I would strongly suggest that there is an urgent need for an educational and awareness campaign at least to make men aware of the possibility of them developing prostate cancer and at the very least to go to their GP for a checkup if they experience any symptoms. Unfortunately many will develop the disease without experiencing any symptoms at all. The reason I started and continue to run a self-help group in Hull, as others are also doing in other parts of the country, was to provide information and support to local men and to campaign to raise awareness and encourage men to go to their GPs. However, it should not be the sole responsibility of men who are in many cases suffering from the disease themselves to carry out this work. The Government should be committing resources to it. My local health promotion department initially produced some leaflets to raise awareness of testicular cancer. When I approached them they agreed to do the same for prostate cancer. I have brought some copies with me and I shall leave those with the Clerk. The idea is that these are put into men's toilets, in places where men congregate. The local Macmillan nurses have also been very helpful. These initiatives could be rolled out across the country at very little expense and would be a welcome start in helping to raise awareness. Another initiative could be for the PCGs and PCTs to take the issue on board and give equal prominence to men's health as they do to that of women. I should like to finish by talking about two weeks' wait. Prostate cancer is the last one to have this introduced by the end of this year. If the Government are genuine in their desire to increase the emphasis on prostate cancer, it should have been introduced at the same time as breast cancer. However, it is no use having an initial consultation within two weeks when you have to wait months for tests and treatment after that; in my case it was six months. I do not know whether my prostate cancer would have been confined to the prostate had I been given the tests six months earlier. There are many, many cases where early diagnosis would have resulted in a cure. We owe it to everyone that as many as possible can be cured of this disease.

  Chairman: Thank you very much Mr Hoe-Richardson. Thank you for your evidence. We wish you every good wish in your recovery from this debilitating condition that is specific to men and we hope the day will come when prostate cancer gets as much recognition as breast cancer does. Thank you very much for your evidence.